click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130117
20130125
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the folks that were elected with us, the senators that have arrived in the last five or ten years. i think we have the ability to respond in a big, bold way to the crises that face us. and i know senator merkley, you came here a young man with senator hatfield i believe and you saw a different senate. maybe you could talk about that and we don't want to stay, i know we're going to a caucus and we have our generous chair here, so we don't want to keep her up there too long, our presiding officer. anyway, senator merkley, i yield. mr. merkley: i think my colleague from new mexico is absolutely right in pointing out there were periods when the senate really worked to address the big issues facing america. and it wawnltd that there weren't -- wasn't that there weren't profound differences. there were fierce differences, emotional differences, deep differences but folks came to this floor, they conversed, they laid out their arguments and ultimately they made decisions about which way to go. and they didn't bring the attitude let's just paralyze this chamber from doing doing nothing. had they d
are up for re-election in north carolina or out west or down south or wherever they're from, i don't think he can lift it. and can that's what i'm talking about in terms of overreach. if this was something where you said close the loophole on gun shows, catch the 40% of people who are going into the shows and escaping, buying guns if they're mentally disturbed and we should catch that and reasonable restrictions. the problem in the heller case and what d.c. was doing is they said you couldn't have a gun unless you registered it, but then today wouldn't let you register it. i mean, that's an effective you can't do it. and that does, in fact, go too far. so if it's a common sense -- and, you know, quite frankly, i don't know why ten. i don't know why somebody needs ten bullets, let alone thirty. so ten doesn't seem like some magic number to me. and, again, to the gun owners, that sounds like something somebody made up, ten. so i think that the president'stive orders -- executive orders can be accepted by the republican party, and if they did the incremental approach of background che
they're worried about their elections. i think that in the center of the country and the red states where these senators are running, they don't think that the president's message works, and they're going to try to move themselves away from that because they're worried about it. they're worried about all these -- >> we're talking about the majority of the country though. if the majority is with the president, is he too liberal? that's what i'm asking. can you call the guy too left when he's right where the middle is? how can you keep saying that? it's the only question i want to put to you. if more than 50% support equality of marriage, more than 50% support a woman's right to choose, if more than 50% are with him on guns and foreign policy, how can you call that the far left? >> let me put it this way, the fact of the matter is this is going to be politically very problematic for harry reid because for the constituency he represents in the senate, they're not going to be able to get a lot of things that the president wants done because it's too far to the left of him. for example,
her outburst is not an outburst. it's a re-election flection of l think about this. if you were going to be real about these issues you would be asking what can we do to beef up the security. something gop members have already cut, you know, and they have decisions to cut it now in these days as we're speaking. it's rank hypocrisy. i think it's a fresh breath of air that people -- >> i agree with you about the hypocrisy because i remember 9/11 very clearly and i remember how this country rallied around a president who had limited ability but we all rallied around him. the first reaction was he says we're going to get the people who knocked down this building and everybody cheered him. they weren't saying how did you screw it up buddy. it was about unit. the left and center are much better at national unity than the right. the right sees a national tragedy like this far off in bengha benghazi, not in new york city, at a very exposed position which could have happened no matter how many troops he would there. we don't blame it on everybody even know it was new york right into the heart
and a number of senators as well. and to ask him directly about the elections and ask him about my second question. but i wanted to get your sense of where you see those lexes going. what efforts you can undertake to make sure that they are free and fair because they've been, i think, central to the next chapter in this transition. i just wanted to comment on that. the second question as it relates to afghanistan is one that senator boxer raised and her work on this has been exemplary, on women and girls and in particular, i have a -- an amendment that we got through the national defense authorization act which would require both state and defense to file a report on the efforts to promote the security of afghan women and girls just by way of itemization monitoring and responding to changes in women's security that will be part of the report. secondly, improving gender sensitivity and responsiveness among the afghan security forces and increasing the recruitment and retention of women in the afghan security forces. so both with regard to the election and women and girls. >> senator with r
. >> my colleague and i went to chicago. this was in the midst of the election and picked up opposition research prepared by jack ryan, obama's onetime republican senate point. he found all this information. the way he frames it, and i think it's probably right, is that obama was always very soft on crime but very tough on guns. every time obama had a crime vote to take when he was in the illinois state senate, he always voted "present" because he didn't want to -- for two reasons. one, he said that criminal law disproportionately affected african-americans. he saw a racial component there. additionally, he said i don't want to clog the court system with all these cases. what do you want to clog the court system with? we thought given his rhetoric on guns lately it would be interesting to bring up this vote where he said i don't want to give tougher prosecution to children who shoot in schools. >>steve: you look at chicago, one of the murder capitals of the world. nothing the president proposed the other day would crack down on handgun violence in chicago. there is one other thing we wa
, people who are bureaucrats, people who are elected officials -- anyone. you cannot have a two tiered system where half of the people that are just civilians have to abide by the laws and everybody else does not. one of the most important factors that each firearm as the president said is being traced. it has to be done at every level. there is nothing to stop a bad cop -- let's say there is one cop who is bad that can stop a criminal with a stolen gun and give it to a friend, keep it, or trade it. all of these firearms, if they are going to go into the process of tree's ability, then it has to be seamless and transparent. no. two, the high-capacity magazines that everybody castigates so strongly, let me tell you something. if you live in a bad area, an area where there are gang members that cruise by your neighborhood all of the time, you do not want to be stuck with a single barrel shotgun or a single shot shotgun. you need to have the ability to protect your family and your friends and your neighbors. as a result of that -- began does not shoot people, you shoot people. -- the gun
't rely just on the fact that your elected representatives are in favor. you can write to them and say merely that i want to vote for this, what you have to do is write to them and say, i want you to use your influence to persuade others to use your influence as chair of the appropriations committee or as a senior member of the minority party in the house of representatives. it is more than just about that we have to ask of our elected officials. we have to ask her leadership as well. >> i will just add on to that. my own feeling is that to get some change along the lines, i think you were suggesting that it will require more gun owners to speak out in favor of common sense regulations. i think that the politicians who feel like they have to work hard for their nra a+ ratings would maybe feel less like that is necessary if they had another group of gunowners who could validate what they can civil to be regulations on firearms. as has been alluded to, but we will go into more detail tomorrow, the vast majority of gun owners are supportive of most of the measures that we are talking abou
purposes. >> i just want to say the whole business about people use today is mitt romney lost the election with the whole horse and bayonet. i wish would stay away from that because the president said were not using bayonets anymore. so it's a different weaponry, but the other thing missing here i think when i talk about overreach, the e-mail you read in general kristol's observation is people say, why do you need an assault weapon? nobody needs an assault weapon, but that's not the issue. by somebody in this country need to have a trial by jury? by somebody who's robbed a bank need to have the fourth amendment having a search warrant before you issue? nobody needs those things. the issue as they were enshrined in the constitution. so you have to make sure you work with what the supreme court has said. the right to bear arms is an individual right. the first of all affect the value can you can have reasonable restrictions, so the path forward for responsible legislators is to find out what the reasonable restrictions are that save lives. i think the taking of when human life is a horrible
confidence coming back after the election? and some of the bigger guys coming in maybe looking for some construction loans, commercial loans that you can make a ton of money on in the second half of 2013? >> well, we saw pretty good loan growth in the course of 2012, pipelines because we had strong closings in the fourth quarter are down a little bit as we transition into the year. i would say that we haven't -- have not seen a big pick-up in confidence in the marketplace. you're correct and we got through the fiscal cliff, but we've got a number of different things, whether it be the debt ceiling, the sequester, the continuing resolution in d.c. that are on the surface. our sense is customers are gaining confidence, they're willing to make marginal investments, but they're going to be very measured steps and they're going to be reflective of a loan environment that's commensurate with a 2% to 3% growth economy. given that we think we'll get our fair share, we'll put some very profitable relationships long-term high-quality relationships on the balance sheet, and at the e of the -- this
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)